Valve looking to ditch Greenlight

Greenlight launched in 2012 and has seen more than 170 games released on Steam that have been through its system.

Valve is looking to shut down its community game voting system Greenlight.

Chief executive Gabe Newell revealed the plan during an introduction at developer only event, Steam Dev Days. Small snippets of news from the event have been tweeted out by attendees.

'Our goal is to make Greenlight go away,' said Newell. 'Not because it's not useful, but because we're evolving.'

Valve is making the move because it intends to give developers more control over Steam and its use as a promotion tool for their games. An exact timeline of when the service will wind down has not yet been revealed and it is unclear if Valve intends to implement a different system for game submission.

Greenlight was introduced as a way for Valve to get through more game submissions to its digital distribution platform. It is used as a way to vote for games that users would like to see listed on Steam.

The service launched in July 2012. Developers can submit a pitch for their game, screenshots, videos and beta versions to help persuade the community that the game should be accepted.

Greenlight has received a fair amount of criticism from the development community, especially after the introduction of the $100 submission fee which was implemented to stem the tide of fake submissions. According to the Greenlight site itself, 422 titles have been successfully accepted with 177 going on to be released.

Valve also announced that Steam has hit 75 million active users, a 15% jump from the 65 million reported in October 2013. North America and Western Europe currently provide 41% and 40% of those users respectively.

How exactly do they have 'complete control' over PC gaming? Steam's digital distribution is not the only way to get games. I bought my copy of 'Skyrim - Legendary Edition' on Amazon for less than it was on Steam and I received an actual disc and everything. Ok, so I concede that it installs Steam but so what? I don't need to use Steam's online features to play the game.

^This^
While Steam maybe the dominate digital distribution platform on the PC they are a long way from complete control of all gaming on the PC. In fact due to the open nature of the PC it would be all but impossible to exercise complete control over it.

EDIT: More OT i never did like greenlight my self, i voted on some games when it was first introduced but i soon lost interest in voting.

Originally Posted by SchizoFrogHow exactly do they have 'complete control' over PC gaming? Steam's digital distribution is not the only way to get games. I bought my copy of 'Skyrim - Legendary Edition' on Amazon for less than it was on Steam and I received an actual disc and everything. Ok, so I concede that it installs Steam but so what? I don't need to use Steam's online features to play the game.

If Valve turns the servers off (or someone turns them off for them)....your retail copy won't work, and that disc you've got will be worth nothing. That's the problem.

Originally Posted by SchizoFrogHow exactly do they have 'complete control' over PC gaming? Steam's digital distribution is not the only way to get games. I bought my copy of 'Skyrim - Legendary Edition' on Amazon for less than it was on Steam and I received an actual disc and everything. Ok, so I concede that it installs Steam but so what? I don't need to use Steam's online features to play the game.

If Valve turns the servers off (or someone turns them off for them)....your retail copy won't work, and that disc you've got will be worth nothing. That's the problem.

Originally Posted by SchizoFrogHow exactly do they have 'complete control' over PC gaming? Steam's digital distribution is not the only way to get games. I bought my copy of 'Skyrim - Legendary Edition' on Amazon for less than it was on Steam and I received an actual disc and everything. Ok, so I concede that it installs Steam but so what? I don't need to use Steam's online features to play the game.

If Valve turns the servers off (or someone turns them off for them)....your retail copy won't work, and that disc you've got will be worth nothing. That's the problem.

The same could also be said about Origin and UPlay.

The same IS being said about Origin and UPlay...just not yet, in this thread, because it's a post about Valve.

Originally Posted by XXAOSICXXWow...argumentative for the sake of being argumentative!

Nobody is saying it's Valve's "fault". The statement in question was "And still nobody sees the complete control and absolute domination of all gaming on the PC by a single company as a problem?"

Valve will do, of course, exactly whatever they can do to dominate the marketplace - and what a superb job of it they've done! Full credit to them.

Not argumentative, just correcting the misinformed.

And the answer to the statement in question of "And still nobody sees the complete control and absolute domination of all gaming on the PC by a single company as a problem?" has already been shown not to be correct and all but impossible for any company to achieve, for all the reasons given in previous posts.

Its not a matter of one single or any other company having complete control, its about company's like Activision withdrawing titles from digital stores, or even worse when Square Enix decided to shutdown its servers and remove Order Of War: Challenge from customers library.
If a company isn't going to support a game anymore they should issue a patch to remove any online DRM checking, something that a digital distribution platform cant do.

I'm a little glad that they've decided to turn away from the public voting Greenlight system, some of the games getting approved were questionable.
It's a shame for some of the good projects on the waiting list, hopefully in Valve's new 'evolution' they will have worked out some more suitable system for approving new projects.

On the subject of the risk of Valve shutting down the servers.
It's always a very real risk that it could happen (as said the same can happen to Origin, UPlay, GMG, GOG and the others out there) but Valve is the largest so has the biggest potential to cause any real damage.
As scott_chegg said, the team have stated that they have a contingency plan in place if for any reason the servers would go offline.

I have a little back-up of my own in place (as you never know if Valve's other arrangements won't work, or they could change their stance on the matter), which is simply keeping a written directory of all my games with the details of the developers & publishers... so if anything went wrong with Valve's plans, there'd be the option of contacting them to see if they can provide any alternate solutions.

Originally Posted by Phil RhodesAnd still nobody sees the complete control and absolute domination of all gaming on the PC by a single company as a problem?

Complete control/domination? I think that's going a bit far. There are still plenty of other competing platforms out there, and the PC is still the most open gaming platform around - look at Star Citizen, a game that hasn't made it anywhere near Steam and has already made $36 million over a year before it's due to be released.

Originally Posted by Phil RhodesAnd still nobody sees the complete control and absolute domination of all gaming on the PC by a single company as a problem?

As long as other companies like EA, MS, and Ubisoft have something to say about it, Steam will never take complete control. But honestly, I don't see it as a big deal. Steam's community and sales are generally better than what you get on consoles, so far Valve doesn't look anywhere near as greedy as most of their competitors (for various reasons), and on PC you're allowed to boycott a company and get away with it.

While I would fear the consequences of a "monopolizing" DRM for the PC platform, I would much rather have 1 DRM to play all my games than install a new one for every other game I own. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem all publishers are willing to let Steam take care of everything, but Steam has reduced the amount of 3rd party software we were otherwise forced to install.

Originally Posted by XXAOSICXXUntil your hard drives dies, or you buy a new pc, and want to put install/activate those games again...and you can't download the Steam client...goodbye 200+ games from my library.

Until pigs fly, or we get struck by a meteor. Valve have already said that if Steam closed they would remove the need for online checking every 30 odd days. Its not like you cant backup your games or wouldn't be able to DL a copy of Steam, or remove the need for online checks your self.

Like it or not physical media is quickly becoming a thing of the past, and its about time to.

Originally Posted by XXAOSICXXUntil your hard drives dies, or you buy a new pc, and want to put install/activate those games again...and you can't download the Steam client...goodbye 200+ games from my library.

Until pigs fly, or we get struck by a meteor. Valve have already said that if Steam closed they would remove the need for online checking every 30 odd days. Its not like you cant backup your games or wouldn't be able to DL a copy of Steam, or remove the need for online checks your self.

Like it or not physical media is quickly becoming a thing of the past, and its about time to.

Sorry i just don't get what you are driving at, is it that you think a digital distribution platform can work without having to activate the software online ? or that you think publishers should just take your word for it that you are not using an illegal copy ?

Maybe you can come up with a better way of distributing software that doesn't involve wasting valuable natural resources ? And as i have said previously even if Valve go back on their word its not like it matters, or do you think people wouldn't be able to remove the online checks from software no longer being developed ?

It's far too late to bitch and moan about your games potentially becoming worthless overnight after you've bought 200 of the buggers :D If you were genuinely concerned about such an eventuality, you'd probably not have bought the games in the first place. I suggest that you're making a mountain out of a molehill.

Originally Posted by XXAOSICXXThat I've got 200+ games worth a considerable amount of money that *could*, overnight, and with absolutely zero notice, become unavailable to me altogether, and permanently too.

Is this likely? Probably not. Can I suggest a better way of implementing DD? Probably not.

Does my inability to suggest anything better automatically make this an ideal situation to be in? Probably not.

If you didn't want to be in this situation, then you probably shouldn't have purchased over 200 games on Steam then...

I have been hearing people whining about what would happen to their Steam libraries for the last 5 years and frankly it's getting a little annoying. Yet, 5 years later, Valve have never been in a stronger position and people are still whining about it. I'm sure you probably don't give crazy hobos prophesying about the apocalypse much credence, yet a plague of locusts is probably just as likely as you losing your Steam library.

If it was me I'd be much more worried about what would happen to the games I've bought on other DD platforms than those on Steam, because those are likely to be under more threat.

Originally Posted by XXAOSICXXThat I've got 200+ games worth a considerable amount of money that *could*, overnight, and with absolutely zero notice, become unavailable to me altogether, and permanently too.

Is this likely? Probably not. Can I suggest a better way of implementing DD? Probably not.

Does my inability to suggest anything better automatically make this an ideal situation to be in? Probably not.

If you didn't want to be in this situation, then you probably shouldn't have purchased over 200 games on Steam then...

I have been hearing people whining about what would happen to their Steam libraries for the last 5 years and frankly it's getting a little annoying. Yet, 5 years later, Valve have never been in a stronger position and people are still whining about it. I'm sure you probably don't give crazy hobos prophesying about the apocalypse much credence, yet a plague of locusts is probably just as likely as you losing your Steam library.

If it was me I'd be much more worried about what would happen to the games I've bought on other DD platforms than those on Steam, because those are likely to be under more threat.

I'm not unhappy to be in this situation. As you quite rightly say, I've bought into this! I'm also not whining about Steam - it's the best content delivery system I've ever used; And I'm also not whining about Valve - good on them for doing so bloody well for themselves in a market that has apparently been dying out for years.

Is it not safe to explore the "what ifs" these days; to suggest that something that is good is still not ideal; to consider what happens if a morally-sound company gets bought out by a bigger fish that doesn't share the same ethos......can this not be done without being accused of whining?

Originally Posted by XXAOSICXXIs it not safe to explore the "what ifs" these days; to suggest that something that is good is still not ideal; to consider what happens if a morally-sound company gets bought out by a bigger fish that doesn't share the same ethos......can this not be done without being accused of whining?

Exploring "what ifs" is fine if you want to spend your life worrying about things that may never happen like the crazy hobos prophesying about the apocalypse, the rest of us will deal with a problem when it happens.
And It's all well and good to say something isn't ideal but unless you can come up with ways to improve the system, complaining about it achieves nothing.

Originally Posted by Corky42Exploring "what ifs" is fine if you want to spend your life worrying about things that may never happen like the crazy hobos prophesying about the apocalypse, the rest of us will deal with a problem when it happens.

I don't think *anybody* is sat around, wasting their life away, worrying about it. No more, say, than people sat in front of their computer, wasting their life away by telling other people they *shouldn't* be worrying about it on forums;)